Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Feb 27:5:44-51.
doi: 10.1016/j.phro.2018.02.001. eCollection 2018 Jan.

An on-site dosimetry audit for high-energy electron beams

Affiliations

An on-site dosimetry audit for high-energy electron beams

Leon de Prez et al. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. .

Abstract

Background and purpose: External dosimetry audits are powerful quality assurance instruments for radiotherapy. The aim of this study was to implement an electron dosimetry audit based on a contemporary code of practice within the requirements for calibration laboratories performing proficiency tests. This involved the determination of suitable acceptance criteria based on thorough uncertainty analyses.

Materials and methods: Subject of the audit was the determination of absorbed dose to water, D w, and the beam quality specifier, R 50,dos. Fifteen electron beams were measured in four institutes according to the Belgian-Dutch code of practice for high-energy electron beams. The expanded uncertainty (k = 2) for the D w values was 3.6% for a Roos chamber calibrated in 60Co and 3.2% for a Roos chamber cross-calibrated against a Farmer chamber. The expanded uncertainty for the beam quality specifier, R 50,dos, was 0.14 cm. The audit acceptance levels were based on the expanded uncertainties for the comparison results and estimated to be 2.4%.

Results: The audit was implemented and validated successfully. All D w audit results were satisfactory with differences in D w values mostly smaller than 0.5% and always smaller than 1%. Except for one, differences in R 50,dos were smaller than 0.2 cm and always smaller than 0.3 cm.

Conclusions: An electron dosimetry audit based on absorbed dose to water and present-day requirements for calibration laboratories performing proficiency tests was successfully implemented. It proved international traceability of the participants value with an uncertainty better than 3.6% (k = 2).

Keywords: Absorbed dose to water; Audit; Code of practice; Dosimetry; Electron beam; Radiation therapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Audit results in the fifteen electron beams of the four participants for beam quality specifier, R50,dos (top) and absorbed dose to water, Dw (bottom). The horizontal dotted lines mark the separation between ‘unsatisfactory’ audit results (|En| > 1) and ‘satisfactory’ audit results (|En| ≤ 1.0).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Eaton D., Bolton S., Thomas R.S., Clark C. Inter-departmental dosimetry audits – development of methods and lessons learned. J Med Phys. 2015;40:183. doi: 10.4103/0971-6203.170791. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Thomas R.A.S., Bolt M.A., Bass G., Nutbrown R., Chen T., Nisbet A. Radiotherapy reference dose audit in the United Kingdom by the National Physical Laboratory: 20 years of consistency and improvements. Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2017;3:21–27. doi: 10.1016/j.phro.2017.07.005. - DOI
    1. Aalbers AHL, Hoornaert M-T, Minken A, Palmans H, Pieksma MWH, de Prez LA, et al., NCS Report 18: Code of Practice for the absorbed dose determination in high energy photon and electron beams. Delft: 2008. doi: 10.25030/ncs-18.
    1. van Kleffens HJ, Aalbers a HL, Broerse JJ, Beekhuis H, Beentjes LB, Bruinvis I a D, et al., NCS report 2 - Code of practice for the dosimetry of high-energy photon beams.pdf 1986.
    1. Wittkämper FW, Aalbers AHL, Brouwer WFM, Huizenga H, Mijnheer BJ, Piron AJ, et al., NCS report 5: Code of practice for the dosimetry of high-energy electron beams. Delft: 1989. doi:10.25030/ncs-5.

LinkOut - more resources